Vernacular Landscape is a cultural landscape that evolved through use by the people whose

activities or occupancy shaped that landscape. Sometimes termed ordinary landscapes, they
are the surfaces of everyday life that we see all around us and that is created and re-created
daily. Cultural geographers study vernacular landscapes to understand the lives of ordinary
people who live in those landscapes. Through social or cultural attitudes of an individual,
family or a community, the landscape reflects the physical, biological, and cultural character
of those everyday lives. They lived in and are continuously changing. Vernacular architecture
has been described as timeless, countrified, or traditional, with reference to rural dwellings of the
farmer.

To call a building vernacular implies that there is a shared understanding among the
community that the building belongs to a place. Since they have evolved through ages to
fulfil the needs of residents, vernacular houses have a strong feeling of cultural congruity.
High-style designs imitated from outside a region, or the whimsy of a single person that is not
reproduced within a community, are not vernacular architecture. It represents the group's
ideals and views rather than individual preferences. Vernacular architecture is culturally
distinctive, constructed to reflect an ideal, and designed to support daily living and social
standards.

Of Latin origin, vernacular refers to native language or dialect. Vernacular denotes the
commonly used speech patterns characteristic of a specific place. This idea can also be
applied to buildings because vernacular buildings express what is common and shared in the
community, such as a regional dialect. Oliver related the linguistic term to architecture as “a
language of the people with its ethnic, regional, and local dialects.” In this sense, the
structures appear to come to life as a "architectural language" that has been developed
through generations and now serves as a "collection architectural wisdom of a civilization."

TIMELESSNESS OF VERNACULAR LANDSCAPES:

The vernacular house, according to Bernard Rudofsky, is "almost unchangeable, indeed

unimprovable" since it "serves its purpose to perfection." Rudofsky asserted that traditional
landscapes do not evolve or adapt in this way, and that they function perfectly without
modern technology adjustments. EXAMPLE OF BANGLADESH

This way of view ignores several examples of minor changes that were undoubtedly visible
on the day he wrote. This notion of timelessness, it is suggested, is the paradigm that places
vernacular landscapes in a marginalised, stigmatised position, where home forms and
landscapes are relegated to the past, displaced in a changing world, and unimportant in the
future. According to scholars, vernacular traditions have always evolved and are renegotiated
by each generation.

Change is a relevant topic of study because change informs us of who we are. Furthermore,
cultural heritage is not a fixed concept. Architecture, like the landscape of which it is part, is
dynamic and ever changing”. Additionally, cultures are ever-evolving. Therefore, vernacular
traditions, which by their very definition are contextual, must be seen as evolutionary as well.

In the study of landscapes, it is necessary to focus on its human-induced evolutionary nature.

Initially, geographers considered modification of man’s environment to be the dominant focus of
geography, thus acknowledging that the landscape is in a continuous process of creation,
alteration and replacement. Jackson (1963) argued that it is not acceptable for us to seek
preservation above all else. We are not spectators; we are inhabitants and for that reason we must
modify our landscape which is neither static nor permanent. R.J. Solomon (1966) argued that
modified landscapes are equally important as “pure” landscapes. He argued that an integration of
modified elements into the original structure can lead to a harmony in the total effect of the
landscape.

Landscapes and structures don’t change steadily over time but change in great leaps, instigated by
agents of change including technological breakthroughs, changes in social structure, and changes
in aesthetic values. Patterns of local change are significant expressions of place and critical to
understanding the mosaic of identity. Heath (2001) argued that to study patina or weathering is to
study the very element that links a building to its past and to its place. Thus, different aspects of
tradition can change while certain essential elements combine with new ones.

Lewis (1979) argued that “major change in the look of the cultural landscape”, very likely reflects
“a major change occurring in [the] national culture at the same time”. These changes are often
influenced by imitation, which furthers a main undercurrent in studying landscape change. Daniel
Arreola and James Curtis (1993) determined that the disappearance of the ubiquitous yard
enclosure in Mexican border cities was an indicator of changing landscape taste and therefore a
changing culture – one that more closely reflected the tastes of Anglo Americans. Henry Glassie
(2000) likewise determined that house form change in Ireland was directly related to changing
social norms that were adapting to Westernized habits of entertaining guests in
compartmentalized homes. The imitation of Western societies, which is experienced locally in
India more generally as modernization, could be a major influence in the changing landscape of
Kinnaur and a progression toward the international style of architecture.
Developing countries offer additional and unique perspectives of study. Rapoport (1986) argued
that change is seen most clearly in developing countries because of the surviving traditional
material culture (see also Rapoport 1981, 1982b, 1989; Shankar 2005). Therefore, the vernacular
fabric is highly identifiable and often changes greatly between regions.

Vellinga (2006) argued that change to local vernacular architecture does not always represent
destruction of traditional values (see also Dayarante 2008). Roxana Waterson (1989) illustrated
this in the tribal houses of Indonesia where labor migration encouraged new construction.
However, it also encouraged a stronger connection to traditional styles, producing a seeming
paradox. This manifests in a resistance to removing traditional structures even when new
construction is woven in around it – a clear example of hybridity and weathering. This illustrates
how often times, the resulting vernacular expression is more pertinent to the existing local
population who has responded dynamically to local events (Heath 2009). In this way, adaptation
can help keep vernacular traditions viable for future generations.

Most vernacular architecture comprises a hybrid, a mixture of indigenous traditions and new
outside influences that have adapted to the local context (Abel 1997). Heath (2009) and Vellinga
(2004) acknowledged that some traditional styles have been lost; therefore, not all change is
positive. However, studies focusing on modernized, indigenous buildings are rather rare and if
written, are often in negative terms (Vellinga 2006). Researchers tend to ignore change in
preference to landscapes of continuity and authenticity (Upton 1993). This lack of
acknowledgement of change is seen as the shortcoming of vernacular discourse (Vellinga 2006).
Most discussions of vernacular architecture are grounded in two opposing arguments. One
argument states that if vernacular architecture is not allowed to evolve, but instead is held in a
museumified setting, it is no longer vital to its users; they can become disconnected from its
significance, and the outdated language is stripped of its ability to communicate (Vellinga 2004;
Heath 2009). At the other extreme, it is argued that if the vernacular language is completely
replaced with new designs, the culture is then without the presence of its history (Mouzon 2004),
“without roots and very possibly without meaning” (Oliver 2006a, 25). The combined effect of
this argument supports mindful change and research that focuses on social aspects with a respect
for hybrid vernacular landscapes.